BIRTH CONTROL TO BE CONSIDERED ABORTION?

Imagine going to your local drug store and the pharmacist tells you that they will not fill your prescription for birth control pills because it violates their religious beliefs. What about a cashier that will not scan your condoms at the checkout? Both of these have already happened numerous times with the invocation of religious nonsense.

So Bush and the religious right are at it again. This time they are trying to protect these health care workers who refuse to provide/sell contraceptives for religious reasons. They are trying to place condoms and 'the pill' in the same category as abortion.

Replies to This Discussion

From Wikipedia: An abortion is the removal or expulsion of an embryo or fetus from the uterus

From Wikipedia: An embryo (from Greek: ἔμβρυον, plural ἔμβρυα, lit. "that which grows," from en- "in" + bryein "to swell, be full") is a multicellular diploid eukaryote in its earliest stage of development, from the time of first cell division until birth, hatching, or germination.

Okay, so an abortion is the removal or expulsion of a multicellular organism that has already had its first cell division from the uterus. Last I checked, an egg is one cell. It doesn't divide until it becomes a zygote. The contraceptive prevents the egg from being fertilized and becoming a zygote in the first place. Therefore... DEFINITION FAIL! Looks like religion loses... again.

"Let me ask you a question," Valenzona said on ANC's The Big Picture with Ricky Carandang. "If all cats in the world would come to an agreement that they will not have kittens, what will happen to the cats?"

Oh, yes, because EVERY human in the world has decided to use contraceptives and never have kids for the rest of their lives.

I also love how they cite eugenics. This is considered selective breeding? If we were breeding specifically to produce stronger human beings, what about the thousands upon thousands of starving kids in Africa? Were they "selectively bred" by the anti- religious because their living conditions maximize their chance of survival?

He reiterated the Church's stand that any sexual act should be both unitive and procreative. The procreative aspect, which means the creation of new life, should never be disregarded and prevented, especially through artificial methods.

Okay. So we've got two choices. We can either do what they're telling us to do and overpopulate the Earth (we would all have like 100 kids if "every sexual act was unitive and procreative."). Or, we could just never have sex. That also poses the question, since the church obviously just cares about having people pop out as many kids as possible, what is the difference between contraceptives and abstinence? Shouldn't both be considered evil?

From Wikipedia:
Most miscarriages occur very early in pregnancy. Between 10% and 50% of pregnancies end in clinically apparent miscarriage, depending upon the age and health of the pregnant woman.[5] In most cases, they occur so early in the pregnancy that the woman is not even aware that she was pregnant. One study testing hormones for ovulation and pregnancy showed a rate of pregnancy in exposed ovulatory cycles of 59.6%; with 61.9% of conceptuses lost prior to 12 weeks of which 91.7% occuried subclinically, without the knowledge of the mother.[6]

So wouldn't that make "god" the biggest abortionist of all time? The RR really needs to get over its' need to control women.

Chances is higher we will all die in some kind of huge natural disaster. Hey, we are supposed to crash into a comet in about 20 more years and we are currently already suffering the effects of the greenhouse effect. We should have been thinking way long time ago to not overpopulate... but alas, now it's too late :/